Skip to main content

tv   Transportation Authority Full Board 42616  SFGTV  May 1, 2016 11:00pm-12:11am PDT

11:00 pm
thank you again for hosting us. >> thank you for including us in "culturewire." ♪ >> good morning and welcome to the monthly meeting of transportation authority i'm chair mar item one commissioner avalos commissioner breed commissioner campos absent commissioner cohen commissioner farrell absent commissioner kim absent commissioner mar commissioner peskin commissioner tang absent commissioner weiner
11:01 pm
commissioner yee we have quorum thank you i want to thank sfgovtv for broadcasting today's hearing charles kremack and leo and can i have a motion to excuse commissioner farrell who by seconded by commissioner cohen and can we please call the roll or without objection without objection commissioner farrell is excused item 2. >> chair's report on information item. >> okay. colleagues this month the transportation authority participated in several rail system planning efforts including testifying at the high speed rail authority hearing on the craft 2016 high speed rail business plan and monitoring a plan for the transbay crossing the high speed
11:02 pm
rail businessman recommends shifting the projects segment to the northern california direct from the central valley san jose is called to build the southern rail first it is given the benefits and costs to segment, in fact, we urge the authority to expand further san francisco tomato misses the revenues of private investment the selection is more than a demonstration project with strongly believe the future of high speed rail in california and the nation hinges on its success by choosing the expanded project that comes up to transbay terminal the high speed rail authority own business plan estimates the ridership will increase by 76 percent and fair bos by 45 percent and net cash flow but
11:03 pm
with one hundred and ti and private investment will increase based on the numbers it simple makes business sense so far the debate field segment not ios to deliver the statewide project we appreciate the support of caltrain and the sfmta hearing and looking forward to working with the partners to deliver the northern california operating segment in the coming years similarly ambitious projects, of course, the much needed second transbay too many reasons to plan for this important connection the need to rehabilitate the bart 2 the need to facet resentcy in a natural
11:04 pm
disaster thank you for tilly chang to thinking about how we should approach this gigantic problem o with four public agencies with the state transportation and bart and the city of oakland i want to stress the importance of having this second crossing for many reasons including a true regional rail we'll have the chance to continue this dialogue as municipal transportation agency we collaborative across the city and region for the local transportation in san francisco as well as barts plan regional bond and finally thank the region abag and planning department to give presentations
11:05 pm
and the rail generated alternative transportation and boulevard study we look forward to hearing the sites from the agencies that concludes my remarks any public comment on item 2? seeing none, public comment is closed this is an information item item 3 >> executive director's report is this is an informational item. >> tilly chang. >> thank you, commissioners this month as presented a few updates beginning first with a quick update on the local level we did a wonderful delineation from the concerts u.s. secretary of transportations a couple weeks ago and on behalf of the mayor's office and san francisco municipal transportation agency we received the agencies participating berkley and the private partners in the
11:06 pm
community liaison to help our challenge part that have application should we be successful we'll be no evidence around june and involve everyone and implement our strategy to bring innovative transportation on that front we were joined with the chambers trip to washington, d.c. to advocate to thank our delegation for passing did long-term bill for transportation and traffic for the remaining $173 million in the federal administration among other funding for the federal priorities we want to also ask that the ot for the city's sponsorship for treasure island on the initiative a transportation program
11:07 pm
at the state level the high speed rail authority was in the area and received a hearing with mta and caltrain to have the corridors up and down the peninsula and hearing from the colleagues if abag we're working in concert with the regional effort in many of our projects are performing well as suspected but we need to insure the policies and funding will be there to carry forward the projects picture the state active transportation program this is the a t p for bikes and vehicle this is the third cycle of 200 plus million dollars across the state and looking forward to help to refine their applications to get the community members across the
11:08 pm
city for more information contact our agency and also mta and public works that are will be sponsoring those projects a little bit more on the grim side of the state level the 2016 our state transportation improvement program is facing a fiscal year cliff funding and one of the projects on the list is lombard street on the 2016 list because of the inability to close $750 million gap statewide we're not able to - we'll have to move forward with local money to continue to deliver the lombard corridor project with similar fund with sfmta fund to keep to advance the project at the state level so the state funding picture thinks it be in limbo with the legislation and
11:09 pm
the funding bill and state level to meet the needs as well as other transportation infrastructure needs meantime we're working locally particularly this many o month with the transit center upper market to a conclusion in terms of the financing for the mtc provided to the city a regional partner to help us to so we can finish and move towards building the transbay train project has made progress caltrain has entered into negotiation with the value the design build electrification contract and be able to announce the winner of the rail they have a worldwide manufacture of vehicles those contracts will be coming to the
11:10 pm
caltrain board in july and locally to provide for the updates to the memorandum of understanding among the partners to make sure we have the strong oversight as well as funding candidates to support the funding increased number funding for electrification on the local side we will have again, a presentation later today on the rail yard study i'll note on march 30th the planning department held a planning meeting we'll hear in the planning department on that and on vision zero we want to commend thank the vision zero committee for meeting on matrix 31st and sfmta that presented the draft list of next high propriety vision zero project so my understanding this is a mix of capital and enforcement and education projects but on the
11:11 pm
anti speeding a new campaign was shared the implementation of a safe drive for city staff and, of course, mta continued to work on the speed enforcement bill sometime in the next session and finally your sfmta and transportation authority attend a summit by caltrain in early april there port a shift as well continuing on at the state level whoops excuse me - locally i wanted to also thing and congratulate walk sf and many of the commissioners who participated in the walk to work today very successful on april 7th this month and in addition wanted to encourage folks to take part in the bike and walk to work events in a few
11:12 pm
weeks how healthy under the influence and fund those modes of transportation how they help our city meet the congestion around inhibit and safety the transportation plan is make progress there was sfmta planners held the meeting concepts that identified safety improvements as well as is traffic calming commencements for golden gate avenue thank you to the sfgov sfmta for the transportation 5 improvement planning study that is happening in the western edition i think i believe more meetings coming up with movj and may 5 the workshop so, please look this up for more information and take part in this you're in the western
11:13 pm
edition area the one grant program this is fell funding by the transportation authority that program is making process particularly public works has made progress in safe routes to school and intersection along elementary school have received bulb outs in addition we've added tax fund are prop k to supplement the corridor their funding with the area prop c programs and prop a on receiving the south side this traffic versus 3 districts 9, 10 and 11 working with the community for bicycle pathways that will start next month our second street vision zero improvement project is making a
11:14 pm
lot of progress with bike lanes 2w7b market and howard and second street as well as left turn restriction from second street to eastbound harrison this is a by the way, with prop k that is making good process and finally i'm pleased to introduce our newest addition our deputy director many of you you know jeff transformed our leading statewide and nationally recognized sustainable transportation planning and land use equity organizations jeff brings a commitment and track record and expertise of sustainable planning on climatic and so we're fortunate to have him we face those complex issues
11:15 pm
and regional thank you jeff. >> thank you priscilla chan colleagues questions or comments relative to the executive director's report move to public comment any public comment on item 3 seeing none, public comment is closed and this is an information item. >> item 4. >> item 4 approval of the minutes of the march 22, 2016 this is an action item. >> colleagues, any questions or comments or changes to the minutes? seeing none, any public comment on item number 4 seeing none, public comment is closed and mr. clerk, please call roll >> commissioner avalos commissioner breed commissioner campos commissioner cohen commissioner kim commissioner mar
11:16 pm
commissioner peskin commissioner tang commissioner weiner commissioner yee the minutes are approved. >> item 5. >> item 5 adopt the positions on state legislation an action item. >> colleagues, any questions or comments with respect to item 57 seeing none, any public comment on item 5 seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection that will be the order item 6. >> 6 award 3 contractors with an option to extend for two additional time pertsdz for northern american and consulting of services and w p partisan for an amount invited $2 million for on call transportation and authorize the executive director
11:17 pm
to talk about the terms and conditions. >> colle questions or comments on item 6 seeing none, move to public comment any public comment on this item? 6 seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection that will be the order item 7. >> item 7 amend the adopted fiscal year 2015-2016 budget to decrease the revenues by $30 million plus and increase expenditures by $23 million plus for a total decrease in fund balance of $26 million plus this is an action item. >> colleagues, any questions or comments on item no. 7? seeing none, any public comment on item 7 seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection that will be
11:18 pm
the order item number 8 >> item 8 appoint bradley to the advisory committee this is an action item. >> colleagues questions or comments on this item? seeing none, any public comment on item 8 seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection that will be the order item 9 >> item 9 allocate $48,000 prop k and plows in prop a funds with conditions and appropriate 6 hundred prop k funds plus subject to the fiscal year distribution schedules this is an action item. >> colleagues questions or comments own item 9 seeing none, any public comment on item seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection that will be the order item 10 and item 10 plan b an
11:19 pm
informational item. >> okay for item 10 we have the mtc and abag. >> with the transportation authority we'll have a 2 part presentation first from the association of bayview governments will be talking about at regional level the land use work for plan bay area and josh with sf planning will relate that to the planning done in san francisco i'll wrap up with some discussion of what is happening on the transportation side so like to introduce miriam. >> good morning, commissioners thank you for making the time to discuss plan bay area per planning and research director at the association of bayview as you may know this think an effort conducted by abag and mtc
11:20 pm
i'd like to cover 3 points in this all revenue the relevance of the plan to date a little bit of the planning process for this update and then what are the key tasks that need to be added ♪ version of plan bayview in terms of the plan to date let me thank san francisco elected officials for engaging in the process as well as the staff it has your engagement ton transportation and housing strategies and cooperation with oakland and san jose with other cities that makes this regional plan a lot more meaningful and closer to the ground so we approve the first plan bay area in 2013 recognized as one of the most substantial regional plans in the state i believe that most is of that is related to the fact that the area came
11:21 pm
to support the effort that were take place at the local level we've been working to connect the land use planning and transportation investment you've worked on addressing the housing challenges with the sustainability and entity to the success of this plan is based on what is happening at the city hall city level we're still as successful we were in 2013 some core challenges let me flag a couple of points san francisco is well aware there are changes in urban lifestyle people are making the choices our folks are choosing access to coffee shops and schools to libraries and book stores to parks as opposed to access e access to housing and shopping malls that has defined a region for the first time in
11:22 pm
the history of the region we're, more multi single families and shifting from suburban from subsection more opportunity to asset the sustainability and exit and comes with core challenges the region experiments some demographic and other changes the region in terms of our population we have becoming a much more diversifies region we're are latinos populations in our asian populations is increasing across the region not in san francisco but across the region a diversity of the population that is an asset but comes with challenges we pay attention to the visions and cultivate extension of those communities we're having a larger senior population that has demands in
11:23 pm
terms of assess to services we also have a stronger economy we're joining the enar very of any regions but that growth we're seeing the polarization of jobs in a shrinking of the middle that consumed with some of the globals investments are resulting in some of the housing decreasing housing costs we're not producing enough housing in our housing are getting more expensive that is creating a series of displacement that we're familiar with it is important to recognize this is happening across the region in smaller cities the concept of displacement was not familiar before it is important to address this challenge of housing affordability in communities and the fourth point is environmental challenges we know
11:24 pm
within the con frame of the plan with the subsequent earthquakes in addition, we have experienced a major drought in some of the flooding that is linked to sea level rise the whole task it is about reducing green house gas emissions it is about connecting translation dollars to land use and housing but primary about shaping and addressing the changes for sustainability that can address entity in other communities so what is the framework for addressing those as you may know with the two simple concepts pirate conservatism places for growth and closest to services and closer to amenities and public places we can capture the vitally of our community and
11:25 pm
preservation we serve our natural environmentalist we grow our fruit and spaces for recreation we have 2 had had permit areas throughout the region and the region has a successful record of returning - retaining our green built in san francisco your similar with the local plans we have 12 permit developments primarily on the eastern and southern side with proximity to jobs and other services in terms of the overall growth this plan shows a higher growth than last time the growth we experienced in terms of populations with employment is a one stronger than and expected we're looking at 2 housing unit 3 million additional people in the next thirty years and
11:26 pm
1.3 million jobs the numbers of housing units is a substantially higher less than seven hundred thousand more than now 8 hundred be thousand a substantial challenge for the region how are we discussing this and what are the alternative patterns 3 scenarios we're discussing with our staff with the transportation staff we're discussing this with cities across the region and basically on scenario 1 or main street it is an effort to accommodate growth throughout the region across cities of all size and trying to focus on the small cities medium and large cities if you go to the other extreme option 3 the big city somewhere
11:27 pm
most of the growth focuses on san francisco and oakland and san jose and option two, that connects it focuses on the 3 big cities and the corridors that connect those on the west side on the east side of the bay so the emphasis is connecting cities of different size and providing a wide range range of the neighborhood scale each the scenarios the land use strategies and investment strategies that support that pattern of work and they intent to have the investments that will allow the growth that will happy in the region to be more sustainable and eligible and lastly the key elements in the update that will happen every 4 years we don't have the allocation but 3 tasks we need to address more specifically the
11:28 pm
population and job growth is the highest so across the board we're expecting higher numbers for city priorities development areas the issue of displacement we need to come up with strategies that are stronger at the local and regional level to address the sustainability of our neighborhood and third addressing resilience at the beginning is imperative we address the earthquake challenge and drought has this that's a short overall of where we are right now and again, it has been an essential component of this engagement of san francisco and we look forward to continue this conversation let me now pass the conversation presentation to josh >> minor good morning, commissioners
11:29 pm
joshua with the planning staff i want to talk about the land engagement working with the process i believe we're working closely together with our regional partners than in recent memory i heard that several abag staff are familiar we have closed relationships with them also have note we have a 5 year work program in the long-term and one key is the bay we are reaching out probably more diligently to our neighbors across the bay in oakland and san jose to find vicinity strategies for the plan bay area for the bonds and transportation needs so as you know, the city has been growing robustly in the last plan bay area targets we've
11:30 pm
achieved over half the job growth in the first 5 years of the plan marry and we're generally on pace with the housing so we eagerly await the reports to see how well, they have shifted as it meshes with our view of san francisco's landscape shaping up we're activity working to see the scenarios in a couple of weeks providing details on the land use capacity and neighborhood plans so they reflect how san francisco using views itself is a complex landscape one thing ear doing we're looking at the
11:31 pm
horizon for 2040 so absorb more growth that leads up to not first and foremost influencing this but when it is adopted in 8021 you've heard interpretations about the 50 yearlong range partnering for the planning and sfmta transportation authority is creating a vision a 50ier vision plan for transportation in san francisco and going with that the 50 year land use set of scenarios so we're trying to look at 50 years ahead how the city evolves so have a holistic look for the next planned area be prepared for the next 4 years this is a timeframe of 20 to 50
11:32 pm
so we're trying to get head i'm going to turn it over to any colleague. >> all right. thank you josh and moirj just to update opposite the transportation side i think the last time in october when you approved the projects we submitted to mtc for consideration and in planned area since then, the staff has evaluated and looking at the assessment so the performances assessment was performed on a subset of projects flowering ones to consultant one a the fact of the matter assessment looks at how it stacks up against the 14 projects and assessments for each the projects the purpose of analysis of
11:33 pm
analysis so identify the high performs the high performer you get consideration funding and local you have to have a case why you're project should be included in the plan eve it's a low performer so some of the projects that were evaluated and just taking into account the performance results this is what we'll talk about next month but in general the projects performed less well in this assessment than in planned bayview we have ideas but as a result we think we'll have high performers we're actively going to have low performers we'll have to justify their inclusion in the plan our main request is we saw our projects perform much, much better in the taupgd
11:34 pm
e taught assessment than the cost assessment there is an inaccuracy in the modeling of the efforts that is used in the methodology so ours main request we when their deciding how the high and low performers and consider the performances the fact of the matter for the benefit costs numbers this is the schedule of what we'll be bringing to you next the key areas on the agenda pretty much through abag and mtc adopt the final preferred scenario in september of this year i want to flag for you and members of the public watching mtc and abag are host an open house in san francisco on june 14th from 6:30 to 8:30 in the evening at 1231 market street we'll be there be there
11:35 pm
so we have a quorum if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them. >> thank you for the presentation supervisor kim. >> thank you chair wiener and talked about potential ways to increase production and affordable housing in the region that is something i was interested in how the you know the housing trust fund so something i've brought up looking at the projects might be within the transit center corridors that we talk about in this presentation i was wondering in abag has begun work on identifying the projects further down the road an example was brought up the taylor project in the district i represent that is a transit oriented project close to bart station and several the lines that were entitled shovel ready
11:36 pm
and ready to go but need the gap funding to get housing into place i was curious there are projects like that around the bay area gotten to that point with the millions to get that cross the finish line to identify the sites and expedite some. >> thank you for your question so we are in the process of come piling that list of projects there is some permanent information not been updated for a few months this is one task the other task is also the communities development areas where the transit is more responsibility the level of housing or the level of housing efforts is important and substantial so we can establish a set of p da a priority within
11:37 pm
the region the priorities that the p da delegations and identifying the projects the housing dollars give us is one important component and just for the benefit of the rest of the commissioners this is a proposal of a regional housing trust fund that comes to supplement the funding that is available at the local level we're working in coordination with fcc and a retreat to discuss the components that comes to support that in addition to this housing fund there is an infrastructure funding that will go in parallel with this effort we're hoping to bring you a summer summary of those projects with the housing trust fund. >> yeah. no, i'm very interested in this project but interested overall in the
11:38 pm
developments potential in these areas and the p da and figuring out i'm sure you've looked at where we have control and there is potential development but even parcels in the p da we don't have control but are vacant a possibility to negotiate with the lymph gland great to have 3 buckets one that move forward that needs a little bit to get across the finish line and parcels we have second control and but you know we need to there's a lot more to figure out and finally, the papers we don't have site control but the list if we want to go and pursue the development in the parcels. >> this is good we'll take that san francisco has a sophisticated soft site analysis many other cities and housing developers that have some of the
11:39 pm
information we don't have a regional platform but we're in the process of getting that thank you for providing that. >> thank you and you know, i think in many ways abag helps support our other parts of our region that may not have the capacity to do that identification and many ways that is a big part of work we're able to help to identify for other multiples to push and even incentivizes that type of development thank you. >> colleagues, any other questions or comments seeing none, move to public comment any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed this is an information item thank you for your presentations. >> item 11. >> item 11 update on the rail yard alternative in the boulevard feasibility study an information item. >> okay. i'll recognize
11:40 pm
director rahaim from the planning department. >> good morning, commissioners director rahaim pleased to present to you the results of first phase of a multiple phase study to look at major transportation systems in the southeast quadrant of the city particularly around the rail yards. >> and the i 280 corridor this is a clunky name i prefer to call it the transportation sued study so it is called the rabbi want to thank the staff of the mta for their work with us an important multi faceted study that looks at multiple transportation systems it converge in one part of the city to get the bang for the buck 0
11:41 pm
on this important part of city i'll quickly talk about the marines reasons for the study and the components quickly we've been asked why are we are doing this now there are projects moving forward there is something on the order of 6 to $7 billion of investment that is proposed for this small corner of the city two the component of high speed rail and north of ask 16th street between the electrification we think that is important to see how they come together to end up with the best results for the city as you may know the recent announced by high speed rail california high speed rail they have somewhat shift they're thinking and now proposing that those trains the high speed rail trains should come north first to get to san francisco by 2025 we think that is incumbent to
11:42 pm
think that is best served the city in the future we are concerned about some of the current thinking in their proposal specifically about some of the crossing high speed rail is pope rather than depressing the trains to depress the city streets flauth it creates situations where the streets will be essentially like highway undertook passes we don't think this is at appropriate way to reconnect the city, in fact, that will further separate the waterfront and mission bay from the city and so on we're concerned the lower image is the current image in oakland with a similar situation exists i don't think we want to see that has part of future so one of many issues of high speed rail and the caltrain system there are a
11:43 pm
lot of existing projects and opportunity we want to address in this study and i want to say the city's position and, of course, the voters positions that high speed rail should come to the transbay terminal we strongly believe we're trying to get it done as quickly as possible there are a number of stand alone projects we want to make sure we're cropping with caltrain and all the entities we want to try to better knit this process so our goals to understand holistically the projects that are in front of the us and shape the future of this city in the best way we can the study has 5 components the first to look at the actual extension of the downtown rail and was call it the d t x that
11:44 pm
connects from 16th street street and the second for potential for a leak moving from the terminal to the system and third the caltrain rail yard for conversion or configuration and reuse of that site and fourth to look at 20th century to see if it make sense to end up with a better transportation system in the end and the fifth to look at the broad range of affordable housing space or development to help to pay for the system as we did the transit center district and look at the land use implementations so the study area is below from market street to about 22 street this is the court of area we're looking at and all of the components in some form lie within this area
11:45 pm
i'll go through each component quibble looking at the alignment for the d t k3shgs along fourth street and second street and into the transit corridor this is the tunnel as proposed about seven years of construction current cost $4 billion and this is the baseline for what we're looking at in our study so we're looking at 3 additional options the tunnel that tunneled under the existing alignment under the pennsylvania avenue and the third an abatement there are no speaker cards through motorbike into that direction all connects to second street briefly the baseline condition the existing alignment we cut and cover tunnel as one of the concerns from the public this is an
11:46 pm
environmentally clear project why are you fooling with that because of the cost increases and the new technology and the boring machines it is time to look at this and see if there is a more efficient way to do this this is the abatement of the essentially on the map but underground an alignment that tunnels under that alignment underneath and through the columns of intrastate 280 and avoids the train under the streets the third alignment is a slight shift to the west west could be done to avoid one of the existing train rails that routing flood this alignment allows us to avoid one of the tunnels by shifting the alignment away from away from
11:47 pm
14th street and townsend and this alignment under 3rd street that could veer off another any points before or after the existing tunnels under 3rd street essentially next door to airport and into second street according to the alignment this alignment has it is about the same distance because of the explores curve in the existing alignment but has the advantage of somewhat straighter shot so that's in summary those are the alignments the one we're taking out of consideration the one that tunneled under the existing up alignment because we don't believe you having, thread this between columns between 280 the towers are to schnauzer we're carrying forward into the
11:48 pm
next phase of the study the notion of baseline condition that is the existing alignment the pennsylvania street alignment and the 3rd street alignment secondly, we looked at 4 alternative transportation for looping the train back, if you will, we looked at four potential locations as you can see on the map we did them one an spear and steward and one in the bay on the south we felt it was worth looking at this this somewhere many phrasing phase of the process we looked at those carefully excuse me - back to second street the two don't seem workable the numbers one and 2 3rd street because of the interning required the high speed rail trains require a broader interning radius so we're not able to make those two components work we want to carry
11:49 pm
the other components into the phase of the study for the implementations and cost thirdly, we looked at the configuration of the rail yard about 22 acres of land in the heart of the city we firmly believe that it is important to look at this land and the possible recognition or reconfiguration of this land caltrain looked at did poenl of reducing the size of the rail yard in the perimeter we looked at this and continuing to work with them and will continue that into the next phase as well obviously an important asset in the middle the city and make sure we can store trains and we believe we were looking possible locations for rail storage and outside of the city as well and finally, the 280 i mentioned for $1.2 million only two places one can cross that highway on
11:50 pm
city streets it is important in a context of a larger transportation city to understand the possible costs and benefits of doing of removing this piece of the highway or notice and 2 will only go forward we think that make sense in terms of the transportation system and as you can see here the potential street connections in the future if we were to do that the obviously san francisco has a heritage already and moving through the freeways not automatically do that but the implementations and want to make sure if 2 were to happen it would create the better transportation system in a long-term public benefit just no summary we're looking at 3 of the 4 alignments on the actual rail lines and two options from the center loop and continue the rail yard relocation study and looking at the notion of a boulevard in
11:51 pm
place of 80s 280 and the land use implementations of those reconfigures if and when they were to happen a lastly to telling you we've pled phase one to look at those options and entering phase two and soon establishing a citizens working group we're some of the names we'll welcome any nominees for much a group and expect this to take 9 to 12 months when we look at 2 detail including the costs and we participate further public hearings two huge ones in the last two weeks in queens of one hundred and 50 people a lot of interest ♪ project we anticipate that so continue as we move forward i believe that that concludes my presentation. and i'm here with susan the project sponsor to answer
11:52 pm
questions >> thank you very much mr. rahaim commissioner peskin. >> thank you chair wiener to director rahaim i have a number of questions first really as a function of governance and d t x move forward any discussion between the various agencies caltrain this body, the city by and through the planning department or other agency san francisco municipal transportation agency as to who will ultimately lead the d t x projects. >> lead the actual design and construction of it. >> that's correct. >> that's certain been on the table we are and as currently constructed tjpa is responsible for financing and building and maintaining the d t x there the been issues that is correct or not but i think that is certainly part of mix of tdecis
11:53 pm
that is happening. >> whether the tear down is necessary for the d t x expansion. >> it is likely not depending on - the alignment but given the enormous public investments something on the order of 6 or 7 or $8 billion not including the term we thought that was appropriate to look at it as a better transportation as a whole. >> relative to the street connections we agree are important are those constrained by 280. >> they currently are the 1. 2 million mile stretch only two places to cross. >> is that part of 280. >> perhaps that could be the case. >> and typography. >> i think that you could make those connections and keep i 280
11:54 pm
if you got the rail. >> could be. >> thank you commissioner cohen. >> director rahaim i'm not sure you're the best person to ask but i wanted to know if any outreach to the bayview community other than - i know that outreach has been conducted and meetings with the boosters but visitacion valley and bayview any meetings or outreach done. >> we've had a couple of large public hearings in the potrero hill area not specifically to the bayview. >> we've gone out to some of the areas and presented to them and if there are any that wants us to present i'll absolutely willing to do that did you mean the cac. >> i contacted them but not
11:55 pm
been to the cac. >> we need to do that. >> thanks. >> okay. colleagues any additional questions or comments. >> chair wiener. >> i'll submit in us as commissioners as is transportation authority as well as county sprfrdz that this is probably the bodies we are the bodies that should be discussing who and what agency should be in charge of bringing d t x to the transbay terminal obviously major changes and and i for one wants to suggest perhaps when the transbay terminal is finished the tjpa lifespan perhaps should be coming to an end essentially every function except perhaps the maintenance of the transbay terminal i think we should be discussing between
11:56 pm
the executive branch and the transbay joint powers authority and the transportation authority though how to make d t x and who is in charge moving forward objective since the passage of proposition h the dollar pining of the transbay to get downtown with the high speed rail otherwise we'll have the most expensive bus terminal in the history of mankind. >> i'll associate myself with commissioner peskin remark i think that one or ones phase one is complete we have a very, very serious discussion actually not then but now about the project delivery of phase two downtown extension not optional and it
11:57 pm
needs to be a collaboration within the city by i but regional and frankly the project is statewide importance in terms of delivery within the city or delivered by the high speed rail authority to make sure that we have a strong plan in place how this project will be delivered and delivered well, i agree. >> and colleagues he also want to express to director rahaim my concerns that tying i 280 to the downtown extension alignment given it's controversy i worry about further delay the d t x i certainly understand the alignments being discussed are interesting whether 3rd street or pennsylvania avenue or the alignment i'm frankly concerned the longer than we will not have d t x to fulfill the mandate of
11:58 pm
proposition h to the extent the i 280 tear down and the investment is connected to the d t x we have experience years and years of controversy and delays so i for one will respectfully suggest that those to things not be altercated together for the i 280 tear down is pie in the sky. >> so i thank you commissioner peskin i'll add the following i in terms of i want to make sure we are by and large the decision of the z t x on full analysis i know people have outside of this chamber who have actually some inside the chamber announced their categorical opposition to tearing down the i 280 before the study it is one
11:59 pm
of the studies in terms of what the alignment will be to d t x we as a city region and state lives with the next one hundred and 200 and 50 years tomato i don't know the right answer in terms of alignment i know we should make sure we get it right and if this means a little bit of extra time to make sure we get that right we stick with the original alignment i for one favor making a decision based on full information and the other thing i'll say i know there's a lot of controversy about the i 80s tear down some of the arguments we're hearing the same arguments in taking down the embarcadero freeway and the extra freeway i think there be few people that would say take down either of
12:00 am
those freeways i want to make sure we're bays the decisions on good analysis and making on informed choice about alignment because they're political difficulties surrounding that and that is the one hundred and 200 year station. >> so director rahaim. >> i appreciate that i pillow agree that it appears like sidetracking given the scale of investment ♪ part of town we thought that was worth talking about the analysis study i granted you there are serious controversial and if i may i neglect to mention another advantage of taking into account looking at the investment for the future connections i think we all agree the piece bay connections we're hopeful
12:01 am
the second transbay crossing in our future we want to make sure that whatever happens with the alignment to make that connection this is part of that analysis as well >> i want to reiterate how important that last comment was about high speed rail. >> colleagues, any questions or comments okay. seeing none any public comment on item 11. >> seeing none, public comment is closed and this is an information item item 12 and item 12 recognize vince harris director of the construction at the san francisco municipal transportation agency for 10 years of service for the city and county of san francisco this is an informational item. >> through the chair thank you commissioners wanted to recognize vince harris who is retire if the sfmta the capital on program retiring this month he's not here but want to
12:02 am
recognize him for his service vince had a long career and previously severed and muni for the construction from 1999 to 2005 and during that time he oversee the capital improvement as much as third-story and l l r t and the facilities for the redesign apart from the services to the city a veteran of many assignments 35 year career the alameda county transportation authority and working in other parts of country like texas and washington, d.c. in addition to all of his work for the public segment in the infrastructure he always served on any communities on the conference the authority and thank you to vince so far his extraordinary to the city and county of san francisco and the industry as a whole we prepared
12:03 am
this certificate of appreciation and invite commissioner lee commissioner weiner to sign and bring it to you in a week or so. >> any public comment on this item? item 11 seeing none, public comment is closed and this is an information item item 13 and exemplary mr. chair we'll be honoring vince in may at the board of supervisors. >> thank you, commissioner. >> item 13 and item 13 introduction of new items. >> colleagues introduction seeing none, public comment any public comment? public comment is closed. >> item 14 and item 14 general public comment. >> any general public comment. >> yes. >> good morning, commissioners all law for respect are elderly folks with seniors
12:04 am
and of taking care of for our young ones and children of the future as far as having good packing while brothers and sisters and families worthy peers of people all mission destiny for city work of improvements for oneself and the word one should be smart of principles of conservation of resources and work perfectly with excused of system organization and people's management all of career performed their duties one learners how to live their life and the limitation of money resource to produce credit for functions is one of personal journalism with a mighty mission can get a head e head start for
12:05 am
true powers only require one aspect of refrigeration destiny of personal growth and process to set for the loyalty of love and humanity and meaningful duties will be the goal of partial interest and family order and natural management going public with this area of was this ever virtues thank you. >> and additional public comment. >> next speaker, please. >> adjournment
12:06 am
12:07 am
12:08 am
12:09 am
12:10 am
>> good afternoon, everyone. good afternoon. supervisor cowen okay how is everybody doing. >> good. >> let's look alive we're talking about land use & transportation thank you, very much. so this the meeting will come to order the regular meeting of the sfauvengs i'm supervisor cowen the chair and supervisor wiener the vice chair and supervisor peskin and our